- -17
that this automobile was used 96 percent for business. Based on
the limited testimony, and the receipts offered into evidence, we
find that petitioner has substantiated that Mr. Velinsky drove
his automobile at least 23,000 miles for business purposes in
1990. Therefore, based on the 26 cents-a-mile rate allowable in
lieu of actual expenses in 1990, Rev. Proc. 89-66, supra,
petitioner is entitled to deduct $5,980 of the $9,569 of
automobile expenses claimed in 1990.
Petitioner and Mr. Velinsky also deducted $4,800 in rent for
use by Mr. Velinsky of a home office. Section 280A(a) provides
the general rule that no deduction is allowed for the business
use of a dwelling unit which is used by the taxpayer as a
residence. Section 280A(c)(1)(A) provides, however, that the
general rule will not apply as long as a portion of a taxpayer's
residence is exclusively used on a regular basis as the principal
place of business for any trade or business of the taxpayer. See
Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168 (1993).
Under the facts of this case, it is clear that Mr.
Velinsky's home office was not used exclusively for business.
Petitioner testified that the home office was not used
exclusively for Mr. Velinsky's business, and that she and Mr.
Velinsky used the home office for other purposes. She testified
that she used the home office to study and to read. It is well
settled that a home office must be exclusively used for business
in order for the expenses connected with its use to be
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011